Syria and its chemical weapons are again in the news. The Telegraph from the UK has the following headline:

Is Bashar al-Assad, cornered and frightened, considering using chemical weapons against the Syrian people?

4 December 2012

The simple answer is likely yes. But I suspect that he has an even bolder plan. If President Assad uses chemical weapons against his own people, he realizes that he risks direct military intervention from the West. He is certainly aware that the indirect military and political support his opposition has already received from the West is currently weakening his regime. Plus he knows what happened to Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein when the West/USA decided those leaders went too far. Thus, while he may feel cornered, he is likely considering many options.

Here are some other news reports:

Syrian threat widens

December 4, 2012

The festering wound that is now Syria’s Assad regime has become a danger not simply to the people of Syria but to the entire region. And the U.S. is doing what exactly about it?

Yesterday the United Nations announced it was removing all nonessential personnel from Syria — the situation has become so dangerous…the existence of chemical weapons in Syria represent a threat to Turkey and to Israel as well. Both nations are concerned that even in the aftermath of an Assad defeat the weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists. http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/editorials/view/20221204syrian_threat_widens/

Syrian Civilians Better Hope They Die in the Right Way

Dec 4, 2012

The United States has drawn stark lines between acceptable and unacceptable kinds of warfare — and created a double standard in the process.

The United States announced that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government would be a “red line,” potentially triggering intervention. The White House fears that “an increasingly beleaguered regime” may be plotting a chemical attack. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton added: “We are certainly planning to take action if that eventuality were to occur.” Oddly, the international community seems less concerned by how many people the Syrian regime kills than by the methods it uses to kill them. http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/12/syrian-civilians-better-hope-they-die-in-the-right-way/265848/

United States- US President Barack Obama warned President Assad against using chemical weapons. “The world is watching,” Obama said on Monday.

“The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable and if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons there will be consequences and you will be held accountable.” Obama said…

Syria on Monday denied it planned to use its chemical weapons stockpile, after reports that the US had observed officials moving some components of the program. “Syria has stressed repeatedly that it will not use these types of weapons, if they were available, under any circumstances against its people,” the foreign ministry said. http://www.dp-news.com/en/detail.aspx?articleid=135905

Syria’s Assad remains a close ally to Iran. If Iran also feels cornered (it is under economic sanctions, as is Syria, and may face attack related to its nuclear ambitions), the two of them may decide that either provoking an attack from Israel and/or attacking Israel first may get them a bit less cornered as they have tended to hope that at least parts of the Islamic world would support them. Iran has gone so far as to send out a video showing it taking over Jerusalem, which it suggests will cause Muslims from other lands to support Iran, and lead to the formal appearance of an Islamic leader known as the Imam Mahdi (details, as well as a link to that video, are in the article Iran’s Ahmadinejad to Conquer Jerusalem?).

Iran itself has taken steps that may provoke a regional (with Israel) or larger war (the USA itself could sustain damage). What may happen is a regional or even the current civil war in Syria, that somewhat gets out of control and may involve others (including many based in Lebanon) beyond Iran and Israel, may happen and could be a factor that ultimately leads to the fulfillment of Daniel 9:27 (which seems to be a peace deal).

Iran and Syria do not have enough military power to win an actual war with the USA if such a war were to happen (though it could damage the USA and also have its surrogates cause damage). It could, however, severely damage Israel, and since Israel knows that, it may decide it has to hit Iran and/or Syria quite hard if attacked. (But if Iran was able to set off some type of EMP, electromagnetic pulse, bomb or nuclear device in the USA, or Syria release biological weapons, etc. they could cause some real damage.)

Various Western analysts are convinced that if there is a war of some type between Iran and Israel that Iran(as well as likely Syria) will try to strike at what it perceives to be US targets/allies, both within the USA and outside of it. Specifically, perhaps in Iraq and Saudi Arabia, elsewhere, and/or within the USA itself through various “cells” (possibly also involving al Qaeda). This may well happen, but if so, Iran and/or Syria will likely find they has overestimated their power and underestimated what Israel and/or the USA may do in retaliation.

Of course, the Bible shows that Syria’s capital city Damascus (Isaiah 7:8) will be destroyed (Isaiah 17:1). Whether this will happen because of internal civil war and/or an attack involving Israel and/or the West remains to be seen. The use (or even the threat) of chemical weapons by Syria could be a major factor in Damascus being destroyed.

The Bible teaches Damascus has to be destroyed, and probably relatively soon.